IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i20p8547-d428822.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determinants of Different Types of Positive Environmental Behaviors: An Analysis of Public and Private Sphere Actions

Author

Listed:
  • Ralph Hansmann

    (Laboratory for Human Environment Relations in Urban Systems (HERUS), Mobiliar Chair in Urban Ecology and Sustainable Living, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland
    Transdisciplinarity Lab (TdLab), Department of Environmental Systems Science (D-USYS), Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH Zurich), 8092 Zurich, Switzerland)

  • Claudia R. Binder

    (Laboratory for Human Environment Relations in Urban Systems (HERUS), Mobiliar Chair in Urban Ecology and Sustainable Living, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland)

Abstract

A survey of 1206 participants investigated determinants of positive environmental behaviors (PEBs) in Switzerland. Based on a principle component analysis on data for 23 different PEBs, three behavior types were distinguished: (i) public sphere PEBs with politically mediated impacts; (ii) socially salient private “lighthouse” PEBs that convey a pro-environmental message; and (iii) less socially salient private PEBs. An environmental behavior model identified general environmental knowledge and attitudes as the strongest predictors of PEBs, followed by green self-identity, justifications, assumed consequences, prescriptive social norms, gender, age, and perceived behavioral control (PBC), respectively. To promote sustainability-oriented behaviors and achieve corresponding societal and economic changes, the identified psychological factors need to be promoted by education and communication strategies as well as complementary measures ranging from policy changes to technology development and systems design. Green self-identity turned out to be significantly more influential for private PEBs than for public sphere PEBs, whereas prescriptive social norms and environmental knowledge were more important for public sphere PEBs. These findings indicate that promoting different types of sustainability-oriented behaviors may require distinct strategies. Public sphere PEBs may be enhanced well by conveying social practices and norms, whereas the promotion of a pro-environmental green self-identity may increase private sphere PEBs effectively.

Suggested Citation

  • Ralph Hansmann & Claudia R. Binder, 2020. "Determinants of Different Types of Positive Environmental Behaviors: An Analysis of Public and Private Sphere Actions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-30, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:20:p:8547-:d:428822
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/20/8547/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/20/8547/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anastasia Gkargkavouzi & George Halkos & Steriani Matsiori, 2019. "A Multi-dimensional Measure of Environmental Behavior: Exploring the Predictive Power of Connectedness to Nature, Ecological Worldview and Environmental Concern," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 143(2), pages 859-879, June.
    2. Farrow, Katherine & Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette, 2017. "Social Norms and Pro-environmental Behavior: A Review of the Evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 1-13.
    3. Huang, Huiping, 2016. "Media use, environmental beliefs, self-efficacy, and pro-environmental behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 2206-2212.
    4. Wei-Ta Fang & Yi-Te Chiang & Eric Ng & Jen-Chieh Lo, 2019. "Using the Norm Activation Model to Predict the Pro-Environmental Behaviors of Public Servants at the Central and Local Governments in Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-20, July.
    5. Johe, Miles H. & Bhullar, Navjot, 2016. "To buy or not to buy: The roles of self-identity, attitudes, perceived behavioral control and norms in organic consumerism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 99-105.
    6. Ralf Hansmann, 2010. "“Sustainability Learning”: An Introduction to the Concept and Its Motivational Aspects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(9), pages 1-25, September.
    7. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    8. Mette Wier & Katherine O'Doherty Jensen & Laura Morch Andersen & Katrin Millock, 2008. "The Character of Demand in Mature Organic Food Markets: Great Britain and Denmark Compared," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) halshs-00343683, HAL.
    9. Idiano D’Adamo & Pasquale Marcello Falcone & Michael Martin & Paolo Rosa, 2020. "A Sustainable Revolution: Let’s Go Sustainable to Get Our Globe Cleaner," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-5, May.
    10. Kilbourne, William & Pickett, Gregory, 2008. "How materialism affects environmental beliefs, concern, and environmentally responsible behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(9), pages 885-893, September.
    11. Andreas Chatzidakis & Sally Hibbert & Andrew Smith, 2007. "Why People Don’t Take their Concerns about Fair Trade to the Supermarket: The Role of Neutralisation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 89-100, August.
    12. Ralph Hansmann & Nora Steimer, 2015. "Linking an Integrative Behavior Model to Elements of Environmental Campaigns: An Analysis of Face-to-Face Communication and Posters against Littering," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-20, May.
    13. Sander van der Linden, 2018. "Warm glow is associated with low- but not high-cost sustainable behaviour," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 1(1), pages 28-30, January.
    14. Farrow, Katherine & Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette, 2017. "Social Norms and Pro-environmental Behavior: A Review of the Evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 1-13.
    15. Mette Wier & Katherine O'Doherty Jensen & Laura Morch Andersen & Katrin Millock, 2008. "The Character of Demand in Mature Organic Food Markets: Great Britain and Denmark Compared," Post-Print halshs-00343683, HAL.
    16. Tom R. Burns, 2012. "The Sustainability Revolution: A Societal Paradigm Shift," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-17, May.
    17. Wier, Mette & O'Doherty Jensen, Katherine & Andersen, Laura Mørch & Millock, Katrin, 2008. "The character of demand in mature organic food markets: Great Britain and Denmark compared," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 406-421, October.
    18. Yi-Te Chiang & Wei-Ta Fang & Ulas Kaplan & Eric Ng, 2019. "Locus of Control: The Mediation Effect between Emotional Stability and Pro-Environmental Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-14, February.
    19. Danny Taufik & Jan Willem Bolderdijk & Linda Steg, 2015. "Acting green elicits a literal warm glow," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(1), pages 37-40, January.
    20. Ertz, Myriam & Karakas, Fahri & Sarigöllü, Emine, 2016. "Exploring pro-environmental behaviors of consumers: An analysis of contextual factors, attitude, and behaviors," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 3971-3980.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marta Romero Ariza & Jelle Boeve-de Pauw & Daniel Olsson & Peter Van Petegem & Gema Parra & Niklas Gericke, 2021. "Promoting Environmental Citizenship in Education: The Potential of the Sustainability Consciousness Questionnaire to Measure Impact of Interventions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-20, October.
    2. Marta Cholewa-Wiktor, 2021. "The Concept of Sustainable Development in the Curriculum of the Medical Universities in Poland," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special 2), pages 72-86.
    3. Audronė Telešienė & Jelle Boeve-de Pauw & Daphne Goldman & Ralph Hansmann, 2021. "Evaluating an Educational Intervention Designed to Foster Environmental Citizenship among Undergraduate University Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-19, July.
    4. Valeria Superti & Cynthia Houmani & Ralph Hansmann & Ivo Baur & Claudia R. Binder, 2021. "Strategies for a Circular Economy in the Construction and Demolition Sector: Identifying the Factors Affecting the Recommendation of Recycled Concrete," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-32, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Francisco José Torres‐Ruiz & Manuela Vega‐Zamora & Manuel Parras‐Rosa, 2018. "Sustainable Consumption: Proposal of a Multistage Model to Analyse Consumer Behaviour for Organic Foods," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 588-602, May.
    2. Mausam Budhathoki & Sujita Pandey, 2021. "Intake of Animal-Based Foods and Consumer Behaviour towards Organic Food: The Case of Nepal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-18, November.
    3. Gkargkavouzi, Anastasia & Halkos, George & Matsiori, Steriani, 2019. "How do motives and knowledge relate to intention to perform environmental behavior? Assessing the mediating role of constraints," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    4. Genovaitė Liobikienė & Mykolas Simas Poškus, 2019. "The Importance of Environmental Knowledge for Private and Public Sphere Pro-Environmental Behavior: Modifying the Value-Belief-Norm Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-19, June.
    5. Ahsan Akbar & Saqib Ali & Muhammad Azeem Ahmad & Minhas Akbar & Muhammad Danish, 2019. "Understanding the Antecedents of Organic Food Consumption in Pakistan: Moderating Role of Food Neophobia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-20, October.
    6. Hao-Fan Chumg & Jia-Wen Shi & Kai-Jun Sun, 2019. "Why Employees Contribute to Pro-Environmental Behaviour: The Role of Pluralistic Ignorance in Chinese Society," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-22, December.
    7. Alzubaidi, Hawazin & Slade, Emma L. & Dwivedi, Yogesh K., 2021. "Examining antecedents of consumers’ pro-environmental behaviours: TPB extended with materialism and innovativeness," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 685-699.
    8. Waqas Riaz & Sehrish Gul & Yoonseock Lee, 2023. "The Influence of Individual Cultural Value Differences on Pro-Environmental Behavior among International Students at Korean Universities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-15, March.
    9. Alessandro Concari & Gerjo Kok & Pim Martens, 2020. "A Systematic Literature Review of Concepts and Factors Related to Pro-Environmental Consumer Behaviour in Relation to Waste Management Through an Interdisciplinary Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-50, May.
    10. Karoline Gamma & Robert Mai & Moritz Loock, 2020. "The Double-Edged Sword of Ethical Nudges: Does Inducing Hypocrisy Help or Hinder the Adoption of Pro-environmental Behaviors?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 161(2), pages 351-373, January.
    11. Mohd Yusoff Yusliza & Amirudin Amirudin & Raden Aswin Rahadi & Nik Afzan Nik Sarah Athirah & Thurasamy Ramayah & Zikri Muhammad & Francesca Dal Mas & Maurizio Massaro & Jumadil Saputra & Safiek Mokhli, 2020. "An Investigation of Pro-Environmental Behaviour and Sustainable Development in Malaysia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-21, August.
    12. Phu Nguyen-Van & Anne Stenger & Tuyen Tiet, 2021. "Social incentive factors in interventions promoting sustainable behaviors: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-27, December.
    13. repec:zib:zbseps:v:2:y:2022:2:1:p:44-52 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Alper Ozpinar, 2023. "A Hyper-Integrated Mobility as a Service (MaaS) to Gamification and Carbon Market Enterprise Architecture Framework for Sustainable Environment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-22, March.
    15. Odou, Philippe & Schill, Marie, 2020. "How anticipated emotions shape behavioral intentions to fight climate change," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 243-253.
    16. Audronė Minelgaitė & Genovaitė Liobikienė, 2021. "Changes in pro-environmental behaviour and its determinants during long-term period in a transition country as Lithuania," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(11), pages 16083-16099, November.
    17. Roman Ostapenko & Yuliia Herasymenko & Vitalii Nitsenko & Svitlana Koliadenko & Tomas Balezentis & Dalia Streimikiene, 2020. "Analysis of Production and Sales of Organic Products in Ukrainian Agricultural Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-15, April.
    18. Mahnaz Mansoor & Justin Paul, 2022. "Consumers' choice behavior: An interactive effect of expected eudaimonic well‐being and green altruism," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 94-109, January.
    19. Hasan Fehmi Topal & Dexter V. L. Hunt & Christopher D. F. Rogers, 2021. "Exploring Urban Sustainability Understanding and Behaviour: A Systematic Review towards a Conceptual Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-33, January.
    20. Chiara Franco & Claudia Ghisetti, 2022. "What shapes the “value-action” gap? The role of time perception reconsidered," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 39(3), pages 1023-1053, October.
    21. Massfeller, Anna & Meraner, Manuela & Hüttel, Silke & Uehleke, Reinhard, 2022. "Farmers' acceptance of results-based agri-environmental schemes: A German perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:20:p:8547-:d:428822. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.